is that it now game over no chance of POTUS

 

Rayguns out

Cracks me up Donald. 😂
 

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1214197038063243266?s=21

Edited January 6, 20206 yr by Mounts Kipper

21 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Cracks me up Donald. 😂
 

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1214197038063243266?s=21

he's proper bonkers

This made me laugh earlier!

https://www.facebook.com/groups/48131193354/permalink/10157379479198355/

Official memo sent to Iraqis stating that US is withdrawing. Turned out it was a draft sent by mistake.

Absolute The Thick Of It stuff, this.

Had never heard of the shooting down of Iran Air Flight 655 before all of this. At least I'll have a morbid documentary to watch later if nothing else.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-7858989/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-Ignore-red-flags-revenge-Iran-time-calm-carry-on.html
 

pretty much nails it 

 

Edited January 7, 20206 yr by royal white

1 hour ago, royal white said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-7858989/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-Ignore-red-flags-revenge-Iran-time-calm-carry-on.html
 

pretty much nails it 

 

Sure does, not that the wrong thinking folk on wanderersways will pay any attention.  

I’ve seen Daily Mail and therefore won’t be clicking on anything from that toxic piece of shit rag.

9 minutes ago, Morizio said:

I’ve seen Daily Mail and therefore won’t be clicking on anything from that toxic piece of shit rag.

Imagine being sad enough to read and agree with anything Richard Littlejohn writes? Good god. 

9 minutes ago, Morizio said:

I’ve seen Daily Mail and therefore won’t be clicking on anything from that toxic piece of shit rag.

It's Richard fucking Littlejohn too hes just as menkul as Owen Jones from t'other side

6 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

Imagine being sad enough to read and agree with anything Richard Littlejohn writes? Good god. 

Imagine being sad enough not to believe the truth because someone that you don’t like/agree with wrote it.

Good god.

35 dead at that funeral yesterday, stampede

10 minutes ago, frank_spencer said:

It's Richard fucking Littlejohn too hes just as menkul as Owen Jones from t'other side

As mental? Perhaps. But far far more unpleasant. Has absolutely no redeeming features. 

4 minutes ago, L/H White said:

35 dead at that funeral yesterday, stampede

Such a shame 

Both Obama and George Bush has opportunities to kill this guy, both of them decided it was pointless. The upside of taking out one nutter is off set a day later when he is replaced with another nutter and in the meantime you have inspired another 1,000 nutters to the Jihad cause. It helps the hard liners in Iran push for further escalation rather than moderation of policy. 

Begs the question, what the fucks the point, what’s the benefit to it at all? If George Bush weighed it up and decided against it then it’s fair enough to question the Trump administration’s strategy without it turning into the usually polarised political debate. 

The fact is, many right wing Conservatives from around the world including here and the US have questioned the thinking behind this move, this isn’t just the usual left wing opposition.... 

UK foreign secretary, Dominic Raab, as right as they come...

“Further conflict is in none of our interests.”

Former U.K. foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt, also Conservative...

 “It’s an increasingly dangerous game of chicken that’s going on at the moment, because both sides have calculated that the other side cannot afford and doesn’t want to go to war“

“The job that we have to do, as one of the US closest allies, is to use our influence to argue for more consistent US policy.”

Former U.K. Foreign Secretary JackStraw, left of centre but a solid understanding of the complexities of the ME....

Mr Trump had done what other major stakeholders had decided was not worth doing in ordering the killing of General Soleimani, saying predecessors George W Bush and Barack Obama, along with Israel, had “judged the costs of doing so far outweighed any benefits”.
 

“a gamble which would play into the hands of the hardliners in Iran”.

 

Edited January 7, 20206 yr by birch-chorley

24 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

As mental? Perhaps. But far far more unpleasant. Has absolutely no redeeming features. 

See I feel the same about Jones.

They both produce contrary articles designed to cause reaction so anything either of them say can be rejected out of hand.

11 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Both Obama and George Bush has opportunities to kill this guy, both of them decided it was pointless. The upside of taking out one nutter is off set a day later when he is replaced with another nutter and in the meantime you have inspired another 1,000 nutters to the Jihad cause. It helps the hard liners in Iran push for further escalation rather than moderation of policy. 

Begs the question, what the fucks the point, what’s the benefit to it at all? If George Bush weighed it up and decided against it then it’s fair enough to question the Trump administration’s strategy without it turning into the usually polarised political debate. 

The fact is, many right wing Conservatives from around the world including here and the US have questioned the thinking behind this move, this isn’t just the usual left wing opposition.... 

UK foreign secretary, Dominic Raab, as right as they come...

“Further conflict is in none of our interests.”

Former U.K. foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt, also Conservative...

 “It’s an increasingly dangerous game of chicken that’s going on at the moment, because both sides have calculated that the other side cannot afford and doesn’t want to go to war“

“The job that we have to do, as one of the US closest allies, is to use our influence to argue for more consistent US policy.”

Former U.K. Foreign Secretary JackStraw, left of centre but a solid understanding of the complexities of the ME....

Mr Trump had done what other major stakeholders had decided was not worth doing in ordering the killing of General Soleimani, saying predecessors George W Bush and Barack Obama, along with Israel, had “judged the costs of doing so far outweighed any benefits”.
 

“a gamble which would play into the hands of the hardliners in Iran”.

 

Wasn't Bin Laden killed on Obamas watch? Didn’t Bush go into Iraq wanting to kill Saddam? 
 

Oh I almost forgot about Gaddafi.

Maybe Bush and Obama didn’t have the time to take out Qadsem as they were to busy trying to take out every other tyrant/wrong un in the ME. 

Edited January 7, 20206 yr by royal white

27 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

As mental? Perhaps. But far far more unpleasant. Has absolutely no redeeming features. 

His daughter is really nice if that makes it easier to read? 

10 minutes ago, frank_spencer said:

See I feel the same about Jones.

They both produce contrary articles designed to cause reaction so anything either of them say can be rejected out of hand.

I've not read that much of either tbh but I don't recall Owen Jones spreading hatred and especially targeting individuals in the way Littlejohn has a history of. 

 

29 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Both Obama and George Bush has opportunities to kill this guy, both of them decided it was pointless. The upside of taking out one nutter is off set a day later when he is replaced with another nutter and in the meantime you have inspired another 1,000 nutters to the Jihad cause. It helps the hard liners in Iran push for further escalation rather than moderation of policy. 

Begs the question, what the fucks the point, what’s the benefit to it at all? If George Bush weighed it up and decided against it then it’s fair enough to question the Trump administration’s strategy without it turning into the usually polarised political debate. 

The fact is, many right wing Conservatives from around the world including here and the US have questioned the thinking behind this move, this isn’t just the usual left wing opposition.... 

UK foreign secretary, Dominic Raab, as right as they come...

“Further conflict is in none of our interests.”

Former U.K. foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt, also Conservative...

 “It’s an increasingly dangerous game of chicken that’s going on at the moment, because both sides have calculated that the other side cannot afford and doesn’t want to go to war“

“The job that we have to do, as one of the US closest allies, is to use our influence to argue for more consistent US policy.”

Former U.K. Foreign Secretary JackStraw, left of centre but a solid understanding of the complexities of the ME....

Mr Trump had done what other major stakeholders had decided was not worth doing in ordering the killing of General Soleimani, saying predecessors George W Bush and Barack Obama, along with Israel, had “judged the costs of doing so far outweighed any benefits”.
 

“a gamble which would play into the hands of the hardliners in Iran”.

 

Could not would,  If someone can tell me how we deal with a rogue state like Iran who keep killing foreigners and encouraging and funding terrorists across the world to do the same that will prevent them from continuing this behaviour then I am all for it, otherwise keep taking out them out as and when we/ the U.S. see fit. 

24 minutes ago, royal white said:

Wasn't Bin Laden killed on Obamas watch? Didn’t Bush go into Iraq wanting to kill Saddam? 
 

Oh I almost forgot about Gaddafi.

Maybe Bush and Obama didn’t have the time to take out Qadsem as they were to busy trying to take out every other tyrant/wrong un in the ME. 

Gadafi was killed by his own people during a popular uprising (Arab Spring), yes we supported the uprising but neither the US or any other Western power killed him. 

Yes, Obama ordered the killing of Bin Laden, however whilst I’m sure that created more nutters around the world it wasn’t an escalation of conflict with a country was it? Neither of us would be able to find any credible critic of that move. Especially as it was Bin Laden and Al Qaeda who were responsible for 9/11  

I’m sure both of us can find plenty of criticism of the move against Sadam / Iraq, as each year passes that looks more and more like a strategic fuck up 

The point I’m making is that Trump’s move here seems like a strategic fuck up. I’ve quoted three UK foreign Secretaries who have questioned the move. This isn’t just the left having a usual pop. It’s the left, centre and centre right all scratching their heads wondering what the fuck he’s thinking. His foreign policy is all over the place, one minute throwing the Kurds under the bus and looking isolationist, the next pulling-a stunt like this 

The LittleJohn piece is trying to attribute the criticism to the usual suspects from the left when in reality it’s coming from across the spectrum. 

Just think, why hasn’t Boris supported the move, why has US Foreign Secretary Mike Pompeio criticisers the U.K. for not supporting it? 

Edited January 7, 20206 yr by birch-chorley

There is and has been worldwide sanctions against Iran and its people for as long as I care to remember. These are and were implemented for a very very good reason. 
 

im not saying trumps communication is helpful by any means because it’s not and he does behave like a child at times but we need to not lose sight of the fact that Iran is deemed a very dangerous nation. 
 

no matter how much snowflake outrage there is etc and candlelit vigils #prayforiran and all the nonsense. remember that a chunk of the rest of the world together deemed Iran to be a risk. 

7 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

There is and has been worldwide sanctions against Iran and its people for as long as I care to remember. These are and were implemented for a very very good reason. 
 

im not saying trumps communication is helpful by any means because it’s not and he does behave like a child at times but we need to not lose sight of the fact that Iran is deemed a very dangerous nation. 
 

no matter how much snowflake outrage there is etc and candlelit vigils #prayforiran and all the nonsense. remember that a chunk of the rest of the world together deemed Iran to be a risk. 

You’ve hit the nail on the head, Iran are a dangerous nation, certainly the people in charge of it are anyway. Which means it needs to be handled with care, from what it looks like Trump is using a Tombola machine to decide US foreign policy, it’s all over the place! 

I know many Iranians over here who came here in the 1980’s, they are very decent people and have integrated well into the U.K. They tell me that the majority in Iran are similar and are not hard line Conservative Muslims. Unfortunately the people in charge are hard line Conservatives and rash moves like this just play into their hands 

Very counter productive for me, I don’t usually agree with George Bush but even he gave this move a wide birth

16 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Gadafi was killed by his own people during a popular uprising (Arab Spring), yes we supported the uprising but neither the US or any other Western power killed him. 

Yes, Obama ordered the killing of Bin Laden, however whilst I’m sure that created more nutters around the world it wasn’t an escalation of conflict with a country was it? Neither of us would be able to find any credible critic of that move. Especially as it was Bin Laden and Al Qaeda who were responsible for 9/11  

I’m sure both of us can find plenty of criticism of the move against Sadam / Iraq, as each year passes that looks more and more like a strategic fuck up 

The point I’m making is that Trump’s move here seems like a strategic fuck up. I’ve quoted three UK foreign Secretaries who have questioned the move. This isn’t just the left having a usual pop. It’s the left, centre and centre right all scratching their heads wondering what the fuck he’s thinking. His foreign policy is all over the place, one minute throwing the Kurds under the bus and looking isolationist, the next pulling-a stunt like this 

The LittleJohn piece is trying to attribute the criticism to the usual suspects from the left when in reality it’s coming from across the spectrum. 

Just think, why hasn’t Boris supported the move, why has US Foreign Secretary Mike Pompeio criticisers the U.K. for not supporting it? 

Yet we had foreign secretaries that agreed with the Americans in the past when they was blatantly in the wrong, we had a little war for decades with the IRA, that the Americans didnt agree with, you’ll struggle  To get all allies agreeing, maybe that’s why he kept it quiet? 
 

as for Boris not supporting the move. 

“General Qassem Soleimani posed a threat to all our interests and was responsible for a pattern of disruptive, destabilising behaviour in the region.

"Given the leading role he has played in actions that have led to the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians and western personnel, we will not lament his death.“ 

He didn’t  appear much of a fan.

13 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

There is and has been worldwide sanctions against Iran and its people for as long as I care to remember. These are and were implemented for a very very good reason. 
 

im not saying trumps communication is helpful by any means because it’s not and he does behave like a child at times but we need to not lose sight of the fact that Iran is deemed a very dangerous nation. 
 

no matter how much snowflake outrage there is etc and candlelit vigils #prayforiran and all the nonsense. remember that a chunk of the rest of the world together deemed Iran to be a risk. 

They aren't the only nation in that category. And generally I think the issue is less about what happened and more about the way it happened and the way the USA dealt with it. Poking and irritating Iran is one thing - playing a big game of chicken another entirely. Its in nobody's interests to destabilize the region further or kick off a conflict.